He Gets It

[dressedcheeseside]

Where do we put the kid who has zero interest in academics, only cares about football, girls, partying, huge crowds, huge stadiums and being on tv in prime time every week? This profile fits more “top athletes” than most realize.

 

[iceeater1969]

Where do we put the kid who has zero interest in academics, only cares about football, girls, partying, huge crowds, huge stadiums and being on tv in prime time every week? This profile fits more “top athletes” than most realize.

Can u be specific? Name individuals?

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

Yes it is a strong word. See post above "From 2013 on (last 5 years), here’s our ACC recruiting ranking:
13/14, 11/14, 8/14, 13/14, 8/14, 9/14.
For 2019, we’re 12th out of 14 teams so far."

Abysmal is unfortunately accurate.

I completely agree I love the guys we've brought in defensively the last couple of years, we just need more of them.

I think it is foolish to look at just the rankings for recruiting. Do we have great recruiting classes? No! But we are recruiting to our offensive system which is a little bit different style recruit. Consistently having a top 25 offensive, I will take that over a top 25 recruiting class every year. Now we just need to get our defense to a top 25 ranking.

What I care about is on field performance. Judging how the coaches perform based on how some nitwit ranks a kid in high school is a fools errand.

 

[Oakland]

I think it is foolish to look at just the rankings for recruiting. Do we have great recruiting classes? No! But we are recruiting to our offensive system which is a little bit different style recruit. Consistently having a top 25 offensive, I will take that over a top 25 recruiting class every year. Now we just need to get our defense to a top 25 ranking.

What I care about is on field performance. Judging how the coaches perform based on how some nitwit ranks a kid in high school is a fools errand.

Good points, but the problem we are facing is we're not recruiting enough good players that provides quality depth. Look no further than our special teams coverage and tackling. Last year we lost a linebacker for about four games and replaced him with a true freshman. The freshman played well, but after him the pickings got slim. Also, remember how we struggled at the tackle position last year. We need players that can step in and that can push us to a higher level. Good players can make a program consistent and not go on roller coaster rides like we've seen for the last few years. I can agree with you about recruiting rankings somewhat, but we should be better than 40 to 60 in any ranking that the services gives us.

 

[LongforDodd]

I think they lose early to South Carolina and never completely recover.

I looked for a "keeping fingers crossed" emoji but these, I guess, are the next best thing.

 

[Milwaukee]

I think it is foolish to look at just the rankings for recruiting. Do we have great recruiting classes? No! But we are recruiting to our offensive system which is a little bit different style recruit. Consistently having a top 25 offensive, I will take that over a top 25 recruiting class every year. Now we just need to get our defense to a top 25 ranking.

What I care about is on field performance. Judging how the coaches perform based on how some nitwit ranks a kid in high school is a fools errand.

This same old story is silly. Every other team is recruiting to their system as well.

 

[Milwaukee]

When the "recruiting rankings don't matter" crowd plays that card it's best to just walk away because they're in their own world. There are literally years of hard data in front of them.

Carry on gentlemen.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Good points, but the problem we are facing is we're not recruiting enough good players that provides quality depth. Look no further than our special teams coverage and tackling. Last year we lost a linebacker for about four games and replaced him with a true freshman. The freshman played well, but after him the pickings got slim. Also, remember how we struggled at the tackle position last year. We need players that can step in and that can push us to a higher level. Good players can make a program consistent and not go on roller coaster rides like we've seen for the last few years. I can agree with you about recruiting rankings somewhat, but we should be better than 40 to 60 in any ranking that the services gives us.

When you get outside the top 15 or 20, there’s very little difference that separates the next 50.

I agree we need to recruit better. It would be nice to have the same staff size as the our competition. It’d be nice not to have both hands tied behind our backs.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Can u be specific? Name individuals?

I’m sure the coaches and players could tell you a few names.

 

[RamblinWreck92]

When the "recruiting rankings don't matter" crowd plays that card it's best to just walk away because they're in their own world. There are literally years of hard data in front of them.

Carry on gentlemen.

at this point, it's kinda all that crowd has left though.

 

[AE 87]

This same old story is silly. Every other team is recruiting to their system as well.

So, are you saying that opposition defensive players and coaches are lying when they say our O is unique and requires special attention?

Or are you trying to obfuscate the fact that most other offenses run a similar enough system (ie not unique in the way GT's is), that the recruiting services rankings apply to them?

 

[RamblinWreck92]

Find the anomaly in the 8 recruiting classes prior to CPJ's arrival on the flats:

51, 53, 38, 48, 70, 62, 15, 51

The 53 is the anomaly. It's the only Prime Number ranking we had in those 8 years.

 

[AE 87]

Fwiw, I agree that recruiting to the system only affects the margins.

It should not be used as a suggestion that we are recruiting that much better than we are.

 

[MountainBuzzMan]

When the "recruiting rankings don't matter" crowd plays that card it's best to just walk away because they're in their own world. There are literally years of hard data in front of them.

Carry on gentlemen.

No one said they did not matter. What was said is it was foolish to judge a coach by his recruiting class rankings. I look at his on field offensive performance compared to the recruiting rankings for offensive players and based on the vast disparity, I take performance every time over rankings. To the point where rankings should be simple dismissed. (Concerning offensive players). Since we don't have a similar magic bullet for the defense and there is correlation for rankings vs performance, then defensive player rankings matter.

 

[Gold1]

When the "recruiting rankings don't matter" crowd plays that card it's best to just walk away because they're in their own world. There are literally years of hard data in front of them.

Carry on gentlemen.

Nah man CPJ can coach em up LMAO

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

My humble opinion on the recruiting side of this.... I agree that recruiting rankings aren't terribly important on the offensive side of the ball with this program. You are looking for a specific type of player in most cases.

On defense.... they do matter. It's not like Tech runs the option on defense. They need the same things that every defense in America needs. Great corners, linebackers, safeties, etc. So if you go back to the 2014 class and look at defensive player ratings, it is pretty consistent.. Tech needs to get better on defense, and Woody should do a lot for that but they need better players. More speed, more size, more talent.

Georgia Tech is among the nations leaders in time of possession, and when you pair that with a powerhouse defense good things happen. The offense will be there. CPJ knows how to be productive on that end of the field with particular types of players, but if Georgia Tech wants to compete for ACC Championships, it needs to aggressively build toward a great defense.

2014 Class
12 defensive commits
1 4star/10 3stars/1 2stars

2015 Class
11 defensive commits
11 3stars

2016 Class
8 defensive commits
1 4star/4 3stars/4 2stars

2017 Class
13 defensive commits
4 4stars/6 3stars/2 2stars

2018 Class
13 defensive commits
3 4stars/8 3stars/2 2stars

 

[slugboy]

I hear the "we're in a different system", but I don't think it affects defensive recruiting at all. On offense, it should give us an advantage with talented players who fit our system better than others, so that should improve our recruiting ranking, right? Or at least just being a wash. If the offense did make a difference, why didn't our recruiting rankings change a lot when CPJ took over?

You'd think we'd have players fighting to be a B-Back and get 1500 yards of offense.

Also, the things that are advantages in basketball recruiting, like major market city, etc., don't get cited as advantages for football recruiting. Why not?

 

[dressedcheeseside]

I hear the "we're in a different system", but I don't think it affects defensive recruiting at all. On offense, it should give us an advantage with talented players who fit our system better than others, so that should improve our recruiting ranking, right? Or at least just being a wash. If the offense did make a difference, why didn't our recruiting rankings change a lot when CPJ took over?

Also, the things that are advantages in basketball recruiting, like major market city, etc., don't get cited as advantages for football recruiting. Why not?

7 defensive 4 stars in the last 2 cycles.

 

[AE 87]

I hear the "we're in a different system", but I don't think it affects defensive recruiting at all. On offense, it should give us an advantage with talented players who fit our system better than others, so that should improve our recruiting ranking, right? Or at least just being a wash. If the offense did make a difference, why didn't our recruiting rankings change a lot when CPJ took over?

You'd think we'd have players fighting to be a B-Back and get 1500 yards of offense.

Also, the things that are advantages in basketball recruiting, like major market city, etc., don't get cited as advantages for football recruiting. Why not?

W/respect to major market city, is it your opinion that Atlanta is a Georgia Tech city with respect to the market and not just physical location?

On what is that based?

If you don't think that, you have your answer on why it's not raised.

 

[year_of_the_swarm]

I hear the "we're in a different system", but I don't think it affects defensive recruiting at all. On offense, it should give us an advantage with talented players who fit our system better than others, so that should improve our recruiting ranking, right? Or at least just being a wash. If the offense did make a difference, why didn't our recruiting rankings change a lot when CPJ took over?

You'd think we'd have players fighting to be a B-Back and get 1500 yards of offense.

Also, the things that are advantages in basketball recruiting, like major market city, etc., don't get cited as advantages for football recruiting. Why not?

You raise a solid point.... What happens at the B-Back position if SaQuon Barkely is the B-Back next year? What kind of production increase would you see in a guy like that vs. a guy like Benson or Howard? Can Tech take a talent like that and give him a shot at the Heisman Trophy?